Books arguing against evolution

[Anonymous No.14101410]

Any good books that give arguments for why evolution is false while presenting an alternative explanation?
Believe in evolution myself, but want to to educate myself on the other sides views arguments (for trolling purposes).

[Anonymous No.14101458]

>>14101410
Everything You Know Is STILL Wrong by Lloyd Pye

[Anonymous No.14101460]

>want to educate yourself on why vaccines and fruit flies don't real

m8 we have empirical shit going on and technologies that won't work without evolutionary theory, so at this point it's flat earther tier retardation to deny evolution like how satellites don't work under a flat earth model so you gotta stop being retarded and thinking there's even a debate in the first place *sips*

[Anonymous No.14101494]

People have literally done experiments in labs testing whether evolution is true. Like the other guy said, denying evolution in le current year is the equivalent of believing in flat earth theories.

[Anonymous No.14101531]

>>14101494
>Like the other guy said, denying evolution in le current year is the equivalent of believing in flat earth theories
So evolution isnt real after all?

[Anonymous No.14101536]

>>14101410
You cannot reasonably deny it with modern evidence
I would however be interested in hearing some proposed alternatives to the current model for mechanisms of evolution
also important to remember that evolution does not preclude the existence of God and anyone who argues in that direction should leave

[Anonymous No.14101578]

>>14101494
Just cause its true doesn't mean you cant elegantly argue against it.

For example
>People have literally done experiments in labs testing whether evolution is true
I imagine these experiments mostly concern bacteria or maybe small insects adapting? I'm sure some attempt can be made to argue that these are not necessarily scalable examples and there might be limits to how far a species can change or something.
Failing that I guess there is the total sophist option of pointing out biologists have a hard time explaining how people could evolve to look different but still be the same cognitively. And since obviously we are all equal, evolution must be wrong.

[Anonymous No.14101615]

>>14101578
Based

[Anonymous No.14101624]

>>14101578
>And since obviously we are all equal, evolution must be wrong.
this has potential

[Anonymous No.14101671]

>>14101624
This only has potential because modern academia is so obsessed with being politically correct.
evolutionary biology has many justifications for racism that wouldn't even rely on different races having demonstrably distinct ranges/averages of cognitive ability, athletic ability, or susceotibility to different diseases. From a naturalistic point of view racism can be justified as the less related an animal is from another animal (within it's own species) the less it will care about its wellbeing.
It even makes sense that if humans evolved in africa then those in that region would be the most primitive as they did not have the superiority to leave and establish themselves in foreign niches
One has to keep these interpretations quiet for now because people will turn on you but in a few decades it'll have come around again

[Anonymous No.14101674]

http://www.starlarvae.org/

[Anonymous No.14101688]

>>14101671
Right, I’m saying there’s political potential there. The only people who deny evolution are Christian conservative types, so it’s not as if these politically correct people will simply deny evolution. Maybe I’m just not exposed to their types enough, but I honestly have no idea how they would respond to such a dilemma.

[Anonymous No.14101702]

James Perloff, The Case against Darwin: Why the Evidence Should Be Examined
Phillip E. Johnson, Darwin On Trial
Evolution: A Theory in Crisis by Michael Denton
Defeating Darwinism By Opening Minds by Phillip Johnson
The Evolution Deceit by Adnan Oktar (Muslim)
Darwin's Black Box by Michael Behr
Refuting Evolution by Jonathan Sarfati
The Lie: Evolution by Kenneth Ham

[Anonymous No.14101761]

>>14101578
We have the skulls and bones of pre-HSS humanoids and a host of other intermediate animals ,and we can observe the effects of selection on ethnic/religious minority groups. There's zero evidence that tests made in labs on insects or microorganisms can't yield results relevant to larger or more sophisticated creatures.
>biologists have a hard time explaining how people could evolve to look different but still be the same cognitively
They don't. Different individuals carry different genes adaptive to different aspects of the environment. A high IQ person will have a lower testosterone level than a low IQ person, and accordingly will have a different physiogonomy. Same with introverts/extroverts. Race mixing too explains a good deal of differences in appearance (members of racially homogeneous groups tend to look very similar-see Asians and sub-saharan africans).

[Anonymous No.14101785]

>>14101688
I interact with some people like that, they ignore it.

[Anonymous No.14101873]

It's not that evolution is wrong but that people use it to make massive jumps in rational. Organisms have been proven to develop over time, that's a fact but what started all this? Organic life and it's building block, DNA is ridiculously complex thing to go from 0 to 1 which at least creates doubt and opens us up to the possibility of an external trigger. Also it doesn't explain the massive gap between humans and animals, the basis of evolution is in mutuality developing survival techniques but how did we break away from the heard to such a degree that we can go against our biology.

[Anonymous No.14101880]

>>14101761
History is only as old as the last person to have witnessed it. We can speculate anything, but it's those little things that come back to bite (((fact))) in the ass, so for now this is all "true" but tomorrow is likely another story.

[Anonymous No.14102110]

>>14101761
>A high IQ person will have a lower testosterone level than a low IQ person

Then why are men smarter than females?

[Anonymous No.14102636]

>>14101873
Based.
Darwin gave a good argument for speciation, not the beginning of life. Furthermore, most people don't even know he did his theories before DNA was discovered. The fact that DNA didn't end evolution proves that it is merely the British Empire's ideology to justify its warmongering. It's just the biggest empire in the world that conveniently believes the stronger have a natural right to destroy the weaker nations, it will take some time to fade out.

[Anonymous No.14102655]

>>14101702
>Kenneth Ham
Literal neckbeard tier

[Anonymous No.14102807]

>>14101460
>we have empirical shit going on and technologies that won't work without evolutionary theory
Yes, my toaster could not exist without the idea that I evolved from an ape.

[Anonymous No.14102847]

>>14101410
>No berlinski?

Deniable Darwin by David Berlinski is what youre looking 4

[Anonymous No.14102869]

>>14101410
I think Jerry Fodor was an anti-Darwinian in a sense, and he was not a fundie so that makes him all the more interesting.

[Anonymous No.14102897]

>>14101536
It strongly points towards atheism. Theistic Evolutionism is basically a patchwork job trying to reconcile two if not fundamentally different perspectives, then at least diverse enough to be in constant tension. It is hard to believe that an all-powerful God chose gradual evolution through random mutations during millions of years to create life on earth.

[Anonymous No.14102916]

>>14101410
How did we get all the different races - European, Asian, African, Arab, Hispanic, Native American, Indian, Australian Aboriginal, etc. - from only Adam and Eve? Faggot.

[Anonymous No.14102920]

>>14101494
>>14101460
Low IQs detected. You've both made fallacious arguments.

[Anonymous No.14102924]

>>14102916
OP said he believes in evolution, he just wants to hear the other side of the argument.

[Anonymous No.14102940]

>>14101671
>From a naturalistic point of view racism can be justified as the less related an animal is from another animal (within it's own species) the less it will care about its wellbeing.

Utterly confused argument. From the fact that humans are such and such it doesn't follow that it is a morally good thing that they are so. If anything that only gives evidence that racism is based on a primitive tendency to view those different than you as "aliens", which is perhaps to be overcome in a more advanced society.